From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754074Ab3KCRoA (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Nov 2013 12:44:00 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:36601 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753723Ab3KCRn7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Nov 2013 12:43:59 -0500 Message-ID: <52768B48.5030408@zytor.com> Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 09:43:36 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Josh Boyer , Ingo Molnar CC: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , prarit@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow NR_CPUS=1024 References: <20131101141148.GH8652@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20131103101825.GA6605@gmail.com> <20131103102132.GA6807@gmail.com> <20131103155729.GB9944@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> In-Reply-To: <20131103155729.GB9944@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/03/2013 07:57 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > OK, that makes sense. So in this scenario, we could probably either: > > a) do away with MAXSMP entirely and just depend on > CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK. > > b) make MAXSMP something even higher than 4096. Like 5120 or 6144, etc. > > Which would you prefer? Either is easy enough to code up, I just need > to know which I should shoot for. > Let's get rid of MAXSMP. -hpa